By Roy B. Blizzard
For those unfamiliar with Church history, some of the words, topics, and discussions seem strange, if not ridiculous. Read the material very carefully. It is very important. Why? Because It will give you an insight into the Western, or Greek, mind from which most Church doctrine developed. As you read, I think you will find it interesting to see how these ideas developed and to realize how much present-day Church doctrine developed from these early controversies or discussions, resultant from an attempt on the part of the Western Church to understand Jewish, or Eastern/Oriental ideas and concepts. I think the information will provoke some thought and, hopefully, you will find it helpful. The following is part II of "Heresies, Controversies, and Schisms in the Early Church."
To the modern mind, these Gnostic systems seem complicated and bizarre. In general, they held that there exists a first principle, the all-Father, unknowable, who is love, and who, alone, can generate other beings. Since love cannot dwell alone, the all-Father brought into existence other beings, aeons, which, together with all-Father, constitute pleroma, fullness, or true reality.
From this world of the Spirit, the present world appeared. This was the work of one of the aeons who, moved by pride, wished to do what the all-Father had done and create something on his own. The present world was ascribed to a subordinate being, a demiurge who was identified with the God of the Old Testament (a rejection of the Old Testament). This present world has in it some traces of the spirit world. Men belong to this present world and are compounded of spirit, matter, soul, and flesh. Some have more of the spirit than others.
Salvation, the freeing of the spirit from the contamination of matter, is through Christ. Many different conceptions are held about Christ. One is that he was never flesh but pure spirit and just seemed to be a man. Another is that he was an aeon and separated Christ from Jesus, that Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary and sent to be the savior of men. Not all men will be saved, for many have little or no spirit in them and will, therefore, be destroyed. Others, having a portion of the spirit, will be saved by being taught the hidden knowledge, or gnosis, and through faith and works, they will be freed from the contamination of the flesh and will mount to the pleroma. In other words, there were only two classes of people, saved and lost (the predestination concept.)
The principal effect of gnosticism on Christianity was to so distort the person of Jesus as to make him quite different from the Jesus recorded in the Gospels.
The popularity of these heretical movements ultimately forced Christianity to develop a structured organization and to clarify and formulate beliefs. Thus, the first notable steps in the development of what was to become the Catholic Church were taken.
The word, Catholic (meaning, universal), as applied to the Church, was first used in the letter of Ignatius to the church in Smyrna. He declared, "Wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church." The term is also found in a letter from the church in Smyrna written about C.E. 155, describing the martyrdom of Polycarp. By the end of the second century, the word carried with it the dual meaning of universal and orthodox.
In response to heresy, an administrative system developed which centered around the bishops. The first episcopate, as distinct from presbyterate, appears in the Epistles of Ignatius. From the beginning, presbyter and bishop were interchangeable terms with a plurality in every church. The bishop became a characteristic feature of the Catholic Church and fell into different ranks according to the ecclesiastical and political importance of his district.
The lowest level, the country bishops, ‘chorepiscopi’ , stood between presbyters and the city bishops. City bishops, called "metropolitans," were the bishops of capital cities of the provinces. Bishops of the apostolic mother churches were held in highest regard as the bearers of pure church tradition. Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Ephesus, Corinth, Alexandria, and Rome, capitals of the three divisions, ‘eparchiae’, were the most prominent. To the bishop of Antioch fell all Syria as his sphere of power; to the bishop of Alexandria, all Egypt; and under Rome was Central and all Italy.
The name, patriarchal, or eparchal, was first applied as an honorary title for all bishops within the system but, in the fourth century, was appropriated exclusively to the bishops of the three ecclesiastical and political centers of the Empire, Antioch, Alexandria, and Rome, and also as an honorary title to the bishop of Jerusalem.
In the West, the term, "papa," was appropriated by the Roman bishop as Sumus Pontifex, Vicarius Christi, as he is still known until today.
As early as the beginning of the second century, a distinction had begun to appear between clergy and laity in spite of the fact that, in the first century, every Christian was held to be a priest under God. The bishop selected and ordained a subordinate clergy. Among them were presbyters, deacons, sub-deacons, acolytes, exorcists, readers, and janitors. Deaconesses were appointed in the Eastern church and, in both East and West were widows charged with the duty of prayer and caring for the sick.
In the middle of the second century, a major controversy arose over the time of the celebration of Easter. Should it be fixed by the Jewish Passover, or celebrated on Sunday, the first day of the week? Synods met to decide the issue. The controversy, called ‘quarto decimanian’, from the fourteenth day of Nisan, was a bitter one. In the last decade of the second century, Victor, bishop of Rome, declared the observance should be held on Sunday and broke off communion with dissenting bishops and churches. The matter was finally settled at the Council of Nicea in C.E. 325 in favor of the Western practice, which was Sunday (actually to divorce the Church from any connection with the Jewish calendar).
The Novatian Controversy arose about C.E. 110. From the beginning, baptism had been by immersion for the remission of sins. Novatian, at an adult age, grew sick. Nigh unto death, he called for baptism. He received clinical baptism by sprinkling, only on the condition that, if he got well, he would be properly baptized. Following his recovery, he was ordained to the priesthood and rose to the highest rank in the Roman clergy. The controversy arose over whether one unscripturally baptized could attain to such an office. The followers of Novatian advocated strict discipline, and though they admitted the possibility of mercy for a mortal sinner, they denied the church the right of absolution for such offenders. Instead, all who came to them from other communions had to be re-baptized. They considered themselves the only pure communion.
Novatian died a martyr under Valerian. After his death, the Novatians spread rapidly over the Empire and called themselves ‘katharoi’, or Puritans. They maintained that no one who had lapsed from the faith could be readmitted to communion. The movement died out about two hundred years after its inception.
Trinitarian
Very early in the history of the Church, a controversy arose over an attempt to explain the nature of Christ. Monotheism was the fundamental tenet of biblical faith. In Christianity, this one God was seen as a triune god, a holy trinity (from the Platonic trichotomy of man). Others declared this doctrine led to tritheism. Anxious to preserve the unity of God, others espoused a monarchy of the deity; hence, the term, monarchian.
Monarchianism stressed monotheism against those who would make Jesus as the incarnation of the Logos, the second God. There were two groups of Monarchians, the "dynamic" and the "modalistic." The first believed that Jesus Christ was born of the Virgin Mary, and imbued with a power, ‘dunamis’, which issued from God. They also were known as "adoptionists" because they held that this power came upon Christ after his baptism and that he was not the son of God by nature but became God’s son by adoption.
The second group made no distinction between father and son but saw a difference only in the mode in which the divine manifested himself. Modalistic Monarchians were also called patripassianists from ‘patris passio’, i.e., the Father’s suffering.
Sabellius was the most famous exponent of patripassianism and, therefore, it is often known as Sabellianism. He held that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three modes, or aspects, of God much as the sun is bright, hot, and round. Tertullian employed the Latin word, ‘substantia’, meaning status, declaring that God in substance is one. Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three ‘personae’.
These personae have their place in the administrative activity of God, a unity of substance, but a trinity in form and in aspect. The Son was subordinate to the Father. The Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father through the Son. A widely-held concept today.
Origen of Alexandria (C.E. 185-254) taught that the son, Jesus, was but an emanation, or an outflowing from the Father and that the Holy Spirit was an emanation from both. Origen also taught the punishment of the wicked was not final and the redeeming work of Christ extended even to the fallen angels. He was the Father of Universalism (universal salvation). He also taught that the future life would be a time of probation, the concept which paved the way for the Catholic doctrine of Purgatory. Eventually, the Catholic church labeled Origen a heretic because of his extreme views.
A pupil of Origen, Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria, stressed the distinction of the son as a person and implied that the Father had created the Son and that there had been a time when the Son was not and that he was subordinate to the Father.
Dionysius’ friend, another Dionysius, bishop of Rome, wrote urging that he be more careful and make it clear that the Son was ‘homoousion’, i.e., the same essential being or substance, and not ‘homoiusion’, or similar substance (‘Heteroousion’= differentness).
Another contemporary with Origen, Lucian, presbyter of Antioch, saw in the Logos a way of expressing the relation of Christ to God. One of his students was Arias, a presbyter of Alexandria (circa C.E. 320) who claimed that Christ was neither true God nor true man but a sort of demigod, halfway between man and the Father. He was unlike the substance and nature of the Father in all respects and also unlike man because he had no human soul. (This was the beginning of Arianism, which became a major controversy.)
The discussion over the nature of Christ involved the Church in bitter controversy for nearly a century.
Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria (circa C.E. 300), became the outstanding opponent of Arianism and one of the outstanding figures in the entire history of Christianity. Athanasius became the principal advocate for homoousia.
The first Ecumenical Council that met at Nicea, C.E. 325, condemned Arianism although some bishops took a middle position that became known as Semi-Arianism (homoiousians).
Another group called Macedonians, from Macedonius, their leader, also known as ‘pneumatomachians’, held that the Holy Spirit was of an essence inferior to that of the Father and of the Son.
At the first Nicean Council, homoousia was adopted as the basic creed of the Church, and Constantine banished Arias and his supporters. However, the debate continued, and Athanasius again came to the forefront in the debate against Arias. In C.E. 327, Constantine readmitted Arias and other of his followers to fellowship and sought to have Athanasius disposed. Athanasius was banished to Gaul, where he remained until after the death of Constantine In C.E. 337.
Constantine was succeeded by his three sons, Constantine II, Constans, and Constantius, who divided the Empire among themselves. They permitted the exiled bishops to return, and Athanasius returned to Alexandria.
On the death of Constantine II in C.E.340, the realm was divided between Constans in the West and Constantius in the East. In the West, the Catholic Church, supported by Constans, held to the Nicean decision while in the East, the majority opposed it. Athanasius was again disposed and took refuge in Rome.
In order to heal the breach, the two emperors called a council of the entire Church that met at Sardicia (Sophia) in C.E. 343. Athanasius was cleared of all charges and returned to Alexandria.
In C.E. 353, Constantius became ruler of the entire empire. His sympathies were pro-Arian. He sought to achieve unity with councils at Arles in Gaul, C.E. 353, and at Milan, C.E. 355. Athanasius was again sent into exile, C.E. 356, along with others. The emperor forbade the use of ‘ousia homoousia’, or ‘homoiousia’ on the ground that it was not found in the Scriptures, and this position of the Nicean Creed was condemned.
In C.E. 361, Constantius died and was succeeded by Julian who sought to restore paganism. Julian died in C.E. 363, and Jovian succeeded to the throne. He in turn was succeeded by Valentinian I who made his brother, Valeas, ruler to the East. The conflict raged, and Athanasius was exiled twice more.
Finally, in the year C.E. 380, Emperor Theodosius issued an edict on ecclesiastical affairs. He was born in Spain and was anti-Arian. In C.E. 381, the second Ecumenical Council convened at Constantinople, and the Nicean formula, ‘homoousia’, was confirmed, and Arians and Semi-Arians anathematized. Although it persisted until well into the fourth century, the Arian cause was irretrievably lost.
However, there remained the problem of the relation of the divine and the human in Jesus Christ, and the controversy was to continue into the seventh century and beyond into the present. Apollinaris, bishop of Laodicea in Syria, a friend of Athanasius, felt that in one being two complete and contrasting natures could not exist; namely, the human and the divine. He held each human to be composed of body, soul, and mind (or reason). Apollinaris said that the divine Logos was the rational element. The Cappadocians opposed Apollinaris and declared Apollinaris had sacrificed the full humanity of Christ.
Nestorias, presbyter at Antioch and later patriarch of Constantinople, C.E.428-435, made a distinction between the divine and human nature of Christ which amounted to almost a separation into two persons. Christ was not born, only the man, Jesus. Mary, therefore, could not be called the Mother of God. Nestorianism was condemned as heresy at the third General Council held at Ephesus in C.E.431.
Monophysitism, from the Greek ‘monos’ and ‘physis’, single essence or nature, claimed that Christ was both human and divine but had only one nature, that of God. Christ was so completely divine that he had no real human body but only the outward appearance of a man. The fourth council at Chalcedon, C.E.451, rejected this doctrine.
However, another group of Monophysites advocated the two natures in Christ and mixed into this a third and new theanthropic (God-man nature) concept. The fifth General Council in C.E. 553 forcibly suppressed Monophysitism. Monotheletism, from ‘mono’ and ‘thelma’ (single will), followed, declaring that, though Christ had a human nature, he had only a divine will. The sixth General Council at Constantinople, C.E. 680, condemned this doctrine.
Donatism
Donatists, high church men of the fifth century, who took issue with the Catholic Church in matters of Church discipline and martyrdom, were so-called from Donatist, the Great, bishop of Carthage. Their briefs were similar to those of the Novatians. They disappeared in the fifth century.
The concepts of Pelagius (C.E. 370-440) became known as Pelagianism and centered in the question, "How is a man saved? Three answers were given. Pelaglus ascribed the chief merit of conversion to man. Augustine gave God all the glory and made freedom a result of divine grace. The Semi-Pelagianists coordinated the human will and the divine grace as factors in the work of salvation. Pelagius, a British monk, set forth the four basic views. The first was that man has no original sin inherited from Adam, that, sin is not a fault of nature but a matter of will. Secondly, he held that each person has freedom to do good or evil, that a sinless life is possible, and that a man can save himself by his own good works, that is, by the choice to do good. Third, he believed that newborn children are sinless and, therefore, that infant baptism is useless because. there is no original sin. Fourth, he proposed that, while salvation is possible without the law and the Gospel, or by divine grace, these do facilitate the attainment of salvation.
Augustine appeared as the great opponent of Pelagianism. He asserted that man was created in the image of God but that Adam lost all this in the fall. The character of Adam passed to his posterity through the act of procreation so that all are born in sin. Also, through Adam’s fall, man lost his freedom of choice pertaining to salvation which now must be attributed solely to divine grace. Infants dying without baptism are damned because they are born in sin. Original sin is taken away in baptism; yet, the sinful nature remains after. Salvation of man is attributed to grace and faith. Even faith is a work of grace. It depends solely on the will of God. God has mercy on some and leaves others to their merited fate.
The views of Augustine were generally accepted by the Catholic Church while Pelagianism was condemned by the third General Council at Ephesus in C.E. 431.
By the fifth century, the Church to the West had so completely severed itself from its Jewish roots and the historical foundations of faith that the Church from the fifth century onward becomes little more than a shell of the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints. The history of the Church from the fifth century onward is well documented and can be studied in detail by the serious student.
It is my contention that it is time for all of God’s people and all those who love the truth not just to acquaint themselves with facts but to begin to make a serious attempt to go back of the Protestantism of the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries, the Catholicism of the Middle Ages, the Dark Ages, the Greek Church of the 3rd, 4th, and 5th centuries, all the way back to the historical foundations of our faith and begin calling Bible things by Bible names and doing Bible things in Bible ways if we expect to get Bible results. I do not believe it is too much to ask nor is it beyond the ability of every sincere seeker after truth.
For further study I recommend:
1) Schaff s Church History (7 Volumes)
2) Qualban’s History of the Christian Church
3) Halley’s Bible Handbook
4) Encyclopedia Britannica
5) Encyclopedia Judaica
6) Unger’s Bible Handbook
